Anti-Obamacare rhetoric leads to questions about motives

I agree with Michael Banerian on the importance of maintaining freedom of speech in America, but his reasons are all wrong. Banerian’s argument opens with emotional language: “…a brave woman…..went on TV and pleaded with citizens…..Obamacare is destroying lives…”, and goes on to accuse the Democratic Party and Gary Peters with: “came down on her rights like a hammer … mafia style politics threatened legal ramifications against any TV station that continued to broadcast the commercial…”

So this is an argument over a TV commercial, correct? A political attack advertisement paid for by Americans for Prosperity — a conservative political advocacy group — rallying against the Affordable Care Act. A TV spot recently revised to delete questionable references to costs and affordability, and replaced with a softer script claiming that choices are being taken away.

In the midst of such a subjective commercial, it’s important to remember that freedom of speech works for all parties, and we hope it works best for those that can support their speech with facts. Facts are not in the forefront of most political advertisements. Facts are dry, emotionless and often boring. They might not generate sufficient response from the target audience. Now, a strongly worded, emotionally charged TV spot (or an opinion letter)? That can get the desired response.

Advertisement

Or it might, if readers and viewers do not question the motives of the author and the facts behind the arguments.

The Detroit News and other media organizations have exposed misleading information in the original TV spot featuring a politically motivated American sadly battling cancer, but their presentation of the facts is not getting as much exposure. Money buys exposure. If the amount of money being spent on anti-ACA advertisements (for the purpose of political campaigns) results in a majority of people believing misleading statements about the ACA, then in answer to Mr. Banerian’s question; no, this is not the America I want.

The importance of maintaining freedom of speech is not so words can be bought by money, but so Americans can have unfettered access to the truth. And that is what millions of Americans have fought and died for.